Bingham County

Which data vintage would you like? I can provide figures from:

• ACS 2019–2023 5-year estimates (most current comprehensive county profile), or
• 2020 Decennial Census counts (baseline, limited detail), or
• 2024 Population Estimates Program (for total population) plus ACS for the rest.

Once you choose, I’ll deliver concise numbers for population size, age, gender, race/ethnicity, and household characteristics.

Bingham County, ID email usage (modeled estimates)

• Population and density: ~50,000 residents; ~24 people per square mile. Town hubs (Blackfoot, Shelley) along the I‑15 corridor see the strongest wired/mobile coverage; outlying farms and some reservation/unincorporated areas have sparser fixed broadband.
• Estimated email users: 35,000–40,000 residents use email at least monthly.
• Age distribution of email users (share of users): • Under 18: 10–12% • 18–34: 30–35% • 35–54: 30–32% • 55–64: 12–14% • 65+: 10–12%
• Gender split: roughly even (48–52% male, 48–52% female).
• Digital access trends: • 75–85% of households have home broadband; 10–15% are smartphone‑only internet users. • Fiber/cable strongest in Blackfoot/Shelley; fixed‑wireless commonly used in rural areas; broad 4G with growing 5G near the corridor. • Email is near‑universal among adults; adoption is rising among 65+, and mobile‑first email behavior continues to grow (work/school and services drive daily use).

Notes: Figures are estimated from county population and Idaho/US adoption benchmarks (ACS, FCC, Pew). Local surveys may vary.

Summary: Mobile phone usage in Bingham County, Idaho

Topline user estimates

• Population base: roughly 50–52k residents, with about 38–40k adults.
• Adult smartphone users: 31k–35k (about 80–90% of adults, reflecting rural adoption slightly below Idaho’s urbanized areas).
• Total mobile phone users (including teens): 40k–46k. Teen smartphone adoption is high, but young children lower this overall range.
• Smartphone‑only internet households: meaningfully higher share than the Idaho average, driven by more limited fixed broadband options outside Blackfoot/Shelley and tighter household budgets. Expect smartphone‑only to be common in lower‑income, Hispanic, and tribal households.

Demographic patterns that differ from Idaho overall

• Age
  • Seniors (65+): lower smartphone adoption than Idaho’s metro seniors; expect a 55–65% adoption range locally versus a higher state average in Boise/Treasure Valley. Feature‑phone and basic plans persist more than elsewhere in the state.
  • Families with school‑age kids: heavy mobile hotspot use for homework in areas lacking cable/fiber; schools report more device‑tethering than state average.
• Income and plan type
  • More prepaid and budget MVNO plans than state average, reflecting seasonal/variable income in agriculture and the end of the federal ACP subsidy causing plan downgrades or churn.
  • Higher incidence of multi‑line family bundles to manage costs; data sharing and hotspot add‑ons are common.
• Race/ethnicity
  • Hispanic residents (a larger county share than the state average) show high smartphone adoption but above‑average smartphone‑only reliance and Spanish‑language plan preferences.
  • Native American residents (Fort Hall Reservation overlaps the county): adoption is high but constrained by patchy coverage and affordability; smartphone‑only dependence and intermittent service are more common than the Idaho average.
• Work/industry usage
  • Agriculture, food processing, logistics: heavier use of cellular IoT/M2M lines (sensors, pumps, fleet trackers) and hotspot‑based field connectivity than the state average, boosting total SIM counts beyond just handsets.

Digital infrastructure highlights

• Coverage
  • Strongest LTE/5G coverage along I‑15/US‑91 and the Blackfoot–Shelley corridor; coverage thins on farm roads and in reservation/rural tracts away from highways and towns.
  • 5G types: low‑band 5G is widespread; mid‑band “UC/C‑band” capacity is spottier than in Boise/Nampa/Idaho Falls, so median speeds are typically lower than the state metro average.
• Carriers and services
  • All three national carriers serve the county. T‑Mobile’s low‑band 5G blanket is broad; Verizon/AT&T have strong highway/town coverage, with mid‑band capacity concentrated near population centers.
  • Fixed‑wireless home internet (especially T‑Mobile; some Verizon where mid‑band exists) is an important substitute outside cable/fiber footprints—more so than the state average.
• Wireline backhaul
  • Fiber backbones follow I‑15 and rail/utility corridors; towns have better backhaul, while rural sectors rely on microwave hops and longer fiber laterals, limiting 5G mid‑band expansion and small‑cell density compared with Treasure Valley.
• Public/tribal initiatives
  • Tribal and county stakeholders are pursuing grants (state broadband funds, BEAD/ReConnect) to extend fiber and improve cellular backhaul; until those builds complete, mobile networks remain capacity‑constrained in several rural blocks.

How Bingham differs most from Idaho statewide

• Higher smartphone‑only household share and greater reliance on hotspots to substitute for home broadband.
• More prepaid/MVNO usage and plan churn tied to seasonal work and post‑ACP affordability pressures.
• Lower availability of mid‑band 5G capacity and fewer small cells, yielding lower median mobile speeds but similar or better wide‑area coverage on low‑band 5G.
• More cellular IoT/M2M lines per capita due to agriculture and logistics.
• Coverage and affordability gaps are more pronounced for Native American residents and in outlying farm areas than in Idaho’s metros.

Notes on estimation

• Ranges are derived by applying recent national/rural adoption benchmarks to local demographics and infrastructure context. Exact county‑level smartphone metrics are not consistently published; where precise figures are unavailable, values are given as ranges to reflect uncertainty.

Social media in Bingham County, ID — short breakdown

Baseline

• Population: ~49,000–50,000 (2023 est). Adults: ~35,000–37,000.
• Estimated adult social media users: 28,000–31,000 (about 75–85% of adults). Note: Figures are modeled from Pew Research Center 2024 U.S. averages, adjusted for rural Idaho demographics; treat as directional ranges rather than exact counts.

Most-used platforms (estimated adult reach in Bingham County)

• YouTube: 75–85%
• Facebook: 60–70%
• Instagram: 40–50%
• Pinterest: 30–40% (skews female)
• TikTok: 25–35%
• Snapchat: 20–30% (skews younger) Additional but smaller: WhatsApp 15–25% (higher among Hispanic/bilingual households), X/Twitter 15–22%, Reddit 15–22%, LinkedIn 15–25%.

Age breakdown (share using at least one social platform)

• Teens 13–17: ~90%+
• 18–29: ~95%+
• 30–49: ~85–90%
• 50–64: ~70–80%
• 65+: ~50–60% Platform tilt by age:
• Teens/early 20s: Snapchat, TikTok, Instagram; YouTube universally high.
• 30s–40s: Facebook, Instagram, YouTube; growing TikTok use.
• 50+: Facebook and YouTube dominate; Pinterest notable among women.

Gender breakdown (directional)

• Overall usage is similar by gender; women slightly over-index on social overall.
• Platform skew:
  • More women: Facebook, Instagram, Pinterest (Pinterest users are majority female).
  • More men: YouTube, Reddit, X/Twitter.
• Local implication: content featuring family, school, community, home/DIY resonates strongly with women; technical/outdoors/how-to video with men.

Behavioral trends observed in similar rural Western counties (likely in Bingham)

• Facebook as the community hub: school districts, church/community groups, youth sports, buy/sell groups, and Facebook Marketplace drive daily engagement.
• Short-form video growth: Instagram Reels and TikTok used by local storefronts (food, salons, boutiques) and events; many cross-post to Facebook.
• YouTube for practical content: agriculture, homesteading/DIY, hunting/fishing, equipment maintenance, and local business explainers.
• Private-by-default youth behavior: Snapchat is the primary chat network for teens/college-age; Instagram DMs common; public posting less frequent than messaging.
• Messaging mix: Facebook Messenger is ubiquitous; WhatsApp use concentrated in Hispanic and international family networks.
• Local news and alerts: Facebook pages/groups often outrank local news sites for updates, road conditions, school closures, and event info.
• Commerce: Heavy reliance on Facebook Marketplace and local buy/sell groups for vehicles, farm/ranch equipment, tools, and household goods.
• Timing: Engagement tends to cluster evenings and weekends when family/community content is posted.

Notes on methodology/sources

• Percentages use Pew Research Center’s 2024 U.S. platform adoption as anchors, adjusted for rural Idaho age mix and known platform skews; county-level platform data are not published publicly.
• Population baseline from recent U.S. Census/ACS estimates.